Originally Posted by Wildefire Walcott

I didn't doubt Aargle's story about the chat log, even though I don't blame anyone who did. It would hardly be the first nor the last time that LL or any other company was arbitrary in their handling of policies (in this case, the policy about not giving any specific rulings on games).

There's another thing to consider though: Linden Lab probably never wanted to ban gambling in the first place. Every casino that closed up shop represented revenue from tier and LindeX transactions that evaporated after the ban. LL banned gambling because their lawyers said they had to, not because of the poor mainlanders who weren't able to get into their sims because of all the casino campers.

Maddening as the wording of the TOS seems, I have every reason to believe that it was carefully worded by LL's own lawyers to give Linden Lab a balance of flexibility and protection. It's almost like they were whispering to game makers, "Psst. Games of chance. Games of CHANCE!!!" and breathed a sigh of sweet relief when Slapnuts and company finally figured it out.

The new games sneak through a loophole, yes, but it's one that LL very likely left open for them. Like I said before, as new legal threats present themselves to LL, the company will evolve its TOS and post new decrees on The Blog, so there's no telling whether these games will be "legal" a year from now.